Sorry to point out the elephant in the room... but American domestic players are nowhere near Mexican domestic players. MLS can increase their spending but for the most part, are limited by the number of internationals per rosters. This makes Mexican teams deeper for roughly similar cost or cheaper. If MLS ever relax the number of internationals allowed or get more youth internationals into MLS academies so they count as homegrown, then you make a great point... until then, MLS aren't surpassing Liga MX.
You are arguing the US mnt had a better decade than Mexico? Guess who missed the World Cup? The US became competitive against Mexico, but better no way. The mls may become competitive and win the ccl occasionally but they are far from being better than liga mx. Bigger budgets mean nothing. There are teams in Colombia that are much better than anyone in the mls with budgets much smaller than Toronto
If you note, my original post, you are a little late to the party with your comment about home grown depth. While our youth coaching generally stinks, the Mexico leagues thought highly enough of the players to sign about 30 of them. When you consider how quickly foreign players can get green cards and fact that US develops a number of decent players despite itself, the difference is a weakness, but not something that money wont fix.
Reread - I'm talking when people thought Mexico was head and shoulders better than the US. In the JK era, Mexico has done better, but the only reason the US has missed a world cup and Mexico hasn't is that US didn't tank in the prior hex like Mexico did in this one. T The league is not only competitive now, but in the future the league will become stronger. In world cup competition, the US has (with a few Foreign born exceptions) had to depend on domestic talent to beat Mexico. To create a better, league the billionaire owners can enlist talent from the rest of the world to do so. If US gets rid of some the incompetent but entrenched people running their youth development programs, things can happen much quicker. I'll leave it to Borden to speak about CSA's issues in player development and to what extent it is, or isn't closing in on Mexico.
We don't have a Division 1 League. The pathway from youth soccer to top leagues is broken and the CSA just got their act tofurther after over 20 years of neglect, so we have been behind. The Canadian Premier League main goal is to correct that. Development of players will be the main goal. The CSA being a major shareholder of the League ensures that they don't lose track of that objective. The league already announced that it will take ideas from what Liga MX is doing by introducing mandotary club minutes for U20 or U23 players.
Seriously I feel like I am in a time machine. Now you are talking about the great foreign players the MLS can attract so that will propel them past everyone? I have been reading this exact post for the past 11 years around here. What is next are you going to talk about all the great progress being made with project 2010? That now America is taking youth development seriously so kids will choose soccer over basketball and football so watch out world the USA has the best athletes Again this isn’t just about budgets and foreign talent. If the MLS where to have EPL money then sure it would be the top league but since it will not be in the champions league anytime soon the riches clubs will remain in Europe as will the top talent. Since the MLS, China, and the Middle East can only compete for the mercenaries willing to take a big paycheck outside of the big leagues it will remain a tier below Colombia, Brazil, Argentina etc. You are living a pipe dream if you think the mls will somehow leap frog them because one Giovionco came over. You would need several of that type of player and now that you have to compete with a few other leagues for players like him the massive improvement in foreign talent just isn’t happening. I am sure 11 years from now I will be having the exact same discussion with yet another mls fan. The USA didn’t miss the World Cup because of Klinssman or Mexico tanking. The USA’s problems are slightly bigger than that. The youth development being Americas biggest problem of all. The pay to play system is entrenched in youth soccer and until that goes young talented players will continue to get overlooked. Mls academies while having greatly improved still haven’t changed that dynamic enough
You poor child. Why do you keep setting yourself up for disappointment like this? The league is dramatically different from 5 years ago? That's preposterous. All they are doing is spending more for the top end players. And even then many of those are just overpaying for washed-up big names. But even for the teams that are buying good young players, the rosters are way too top heavy to be competitive. If anything, the line-up fillers now are probably worse than they were 5-10 years ago considering a) the US talent pool is weaker right now, and b) what little talent exists is more diluted than ever due to rapid expansion. The weak links will continue to be MLS's downfall because LMX teams will abuse them over and over. Also, don't act like Colorado's season 2 years ago was some anomaly. That still happens on a near annual basis. Just last year the Fire had the third best record in the league despite, even when healthy, having a backline and GK situation that was more akin to USL than LMX. I wouldn't be surprised if this year a shit team like Philly makes a surprise jump up the standings simply because their wingers are speed demons who will exploit high lines and players/coaches being too naive to adjust. And give me a break with the MLS dominance is coming rhetoric. Your two arguments are essentially 1) US Soccer "just" needs to fix youth coaching, and 2) MLS owners can outspend their counterparts. Both are pie-in-the-sky nonsense. For one, USSF just elected a stay-the-course candidate primarily on the support of youth soccer. There aren't going to be major changes on that front for some time. And even then you are wrong that the issue is just the coaching quality. Another big problem is USSF's continued focus on the suburban crowd whose kids (12 and under) only play/practice on their youth teams once or twice a week. No amount of coaching can overcome the absence of brain synapses that form in growing bodies. The youth soccer development in this country is so bad, that major overhaul is needed in its structure and focus, not just "get better coaches." Finally, regarding MLS owners' spending, you do realize right that Liga MX teams are also owned by billionaires and have major lucrative corporate sponsors. The amount of money that MLS would have to spend to give it a sizable advantage, they would essentially be spending themselves into oblivion. Is anything in the entire history of the league that would suggest the owners are at all interested in doing that? Every single league mechanism in roster construction is designed specifically to keep labor costs down. They aren't going to suddenly go full Cosmos, especially when the Krafts, Hauptmans, Sugermans, etc. of the league get equal decision power of the big boys.
Most likely a reading comprehension issue on your part but I could be wrong. Can you point to some similar posts.. You got the wrong guy. Project 2010 was a complete joke - basically a list of paid positions that could be filled by incompetent insiders. Almost nothing about development and the results show. With some exceptions, the US is not taking development seriously. Despite this fact, the shear size and wealth has created a number of very good players. MLS doesn't have to be a top league to win CCL. Some would argue all it had to do would get to the level of Swiss Super League and its average team would be better than Liga Mx. Of course those same people would argue the average MLS team is barely above the average Scotland Premiership team. Again, there is a lag between when things happen and most people realize it. Maybe I'm missing something but this forum is about CCL. LigaMx isn't at the level of Brazil and Argentina. But If there was a race between MLS and LigaMx to bet there, MLS would be the hands down favorite of people that gamble for a living. MLS isn't much more foreign than Mexico. When people are taking a pay cut to play, it is hard to call them mercenaries. Reality is that MLS is a far more attractive league to play in for many high end players than Liga Mx. You won't be having the same conversation in two years - or maybe you will be thinking you will. Senility is rough. If either US dumped Klinssman or Mexico hadn't the US would be in. But one of the few things you've posted that I don't disagree with is your disdain for the US player development. However, pay to play isn't the main problem, but instead a symptom. The main problems are structural. Parents of young players get discouraged by a system run by a group of largely unqualified people that designed it to maximize the profit on youth sports participation. Note - pretty quote challenged on this.
I realize project 2010 was a joke that is why I brought it up. I didn’t actually think you where going to pretend it was 2007 Similar posts from 2010-2009 https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/ho...-mls-adopts-uefa-financial-fair-play.1467075/ There where others but suffice to say the idea isn’t new
I was looking for some different points of view. I figured I'd run into a few jerks who pretend to know a lot less than they think they do but you'll get that anywhere on the net. But even for the teams that are buying good young players, the rosters are way too top heavy to be competitive.[/QUOTE]Blanco, Donovan, Marquez or Dos Santos, Vella, Torres? Funny, I don't recall Mexican National teams chasing American raised players 10 years ago. Perhaps you can refresh my recollection but I I'm not holding my breadth because it is pretty obvious you don't have a clue about what is happening.. . I realize Carlos Slim is a wealthy guy and some of Mexico's other 20 or so Billionaires own Liga Mx teams and facilities like Monterrey's are really nce. But there is a huge difference in wealth which is increasingly coming into play.
That's some pretty dishonest cherry-picking. Some of the highest paid players over the last few years have been Pirlo, Schweinie, Lampard, Kaka, Gerrard, etc. who all cost significantly more but produced less than the likes of Blanco, Donovan, Angel, etc. Average MLS salary budgets going up doesn't mean a whole lot when most of that money is used to overpay for star power over performance. Wait, are you seriously arguing that the US talent pool hasn't seen a dip in recent years? Even US fans are talking about this and that's why you guys are putting all your hope in some teenagers to save the day. Where is there an actual difference in wealth and how is that coming into play specifically? Show your work.
Why do you say this, do you claim the u.s. Fed overlooks Latin players. This is a rare opinion, but I'm glad they do, you should have to win with your own kind only. And this gives opportunities for Latin NTs to scoop the diamonds in the rough, it's a shame when your team poaches them. As far as coaching goes, honestly, there's only so much you can get out of those lil suburbanites. A change in youth coaching won't change much. You couldn't be more wrong. The odds are strongly in favor of LMX holding its position indefinitely. No one with any sense would bet on your league. Now I know you're trolling, or just pitifully ignorant. Not at all, your league has 0 prestige. LMX is in solid standing worldwide. Year after year, people see us dominate you in every fashion. Most high end players would choose us over you. Your league is a laughingstock. He actually will, your comrades simply can't help but troll like you do. It's absolutely pathetic to, after a lifetime of being dominated, keep claiming the dominance will end and the tables will turn. Every single year, yall repeat the same things, and every single year, yall get destroyed. This is why we do not respect you, and world football mocks you. You gotta back up your words, and you lot have not since the dawn of this message board. We look down on you as total jokes. Case in point right here: No, you still wouldn't be in even if you dumped Klinsmann earlier. Stop with the hypotheticals and return to reality. Your players are inferior, that's why you're not in the World Cup. And we lose even more respect for you with these pie in the sky hypotheticals you lot always come up with, like a bunch of children. You're not the first of your kind to shitpost here, and you definitely won't be the last.That's why people say that this conversation will keep on happening, people like you just can't help themselves, and you still don't learn your lesson after a lifetime of failure. It's just not gonna happen, your league will not surpass LMX and the usmnt will not surpass the Mexican NT.
They are also favored by avoiding mexican clubs as long as possible, something Costa Rican clubs do not benefit from... EDIT: I see this point was made already, carry on then.
Isn't that still the case in the new format? I think MLS teams are still never paired with LigaMX teams, at least in the initial home/away stages.
Not necessarily. USA4 was in Pot 2 so Colorado could have been paired against a Mexican team in the first round. They were drawn against CAN1, Toronto.
Speaking more broadly, remember that there are 5 MLS teams - 4 American and 1 Canadian. In the previous format, the American teams and the Mexican teams couldn't be drawn against each other at all in the first round by design, and the lone Canadian team was guaranteed to have a strong other team in their group. In the new format, you're guaranteed to have an MLS team - likely an American one - in the lower half of the draw, and could very easily have two if another nation (likely Costa Rica) bumps a second American slot down to the lower half of the draw. Granted, that MLS team or two in the lower half of the draw could potentially still be drawn against an MLS team in the upper half - as we saw this year - but it's more likely to be drawn against a LMX team.
The spots are awarded by country, not by leagues. It's the country's association that allocated the spots they are granted by the confederation So it's 4 US teams (USSF allocated all to MLS) + 1 Canadian team (CSA allocates to Canadian Championship winner) Just like Costa Rica and the others, the teams representing Canada did not get exempted from facing Liga MX in the group stage, granted it hasn't happened since Toronto FC was put in the same group as Santos Laguna in 2012. Subsequently, a Canadian team always had to face an American team at the group stage.
Technically, USSF did not allocate all their spots to MLS. At least one spot is allocated to the U.S. Open Cup winner. That is usually but not necessarily a MLS team. In the 2019 CCL, two of the USSF spots are allocated to the 2017 and 2018 U.S. Open Cup winners.
True, but it's just like how so many people also use LMX and "Mexican team" interchangeably ;-) Officially, it's more broad, but it's effectively just to top league that will be showing up. My point was just to expand upon the nature of the pairings by country - or lack thereof.
MLS isn't the 2nd best league in Concacaf. It's worse than Honduras, Panama, and El Salvador. At best MLS is probably 8th or 9th in this region.
And I'm not trolling when I say this. MLS is really worse than Central America and possibly a few Caribbean sides too. How many leagues besides Liga MX are better than MLS in Concacaf? I think Costa Rica, Honduras, Panama, El Salvador, Guatemala, Jamaica, and maybe Trinidad and Also Ascenso MX.
....yeah, you're trolling. You can't look at the CCL statistics and say any of this. Aside from maybe Costa Rica, MLS teams (and not just the Canadian ones) still get results over anyone else aside from Mexico more often than not, often far more often. Both CONCACAF's rankings and the UEFA-based CONCACAF fans rankings already listed here in the forums show MLS way above anyone aside from Mexico and CRC. And I'm sure if someone did Elo-style rankings for CCL you'd get the same result too.
My point is that a number of folks in the MLS corner appeared reasonably satisfied with a "close series" against Pachuca when the emphasis should have been on the lost opportunity. It's the mentality required to take the next step. That was a stuttering Pachuca that could barely find the net domestically at the time (even if their defense was sound.) Contrast that with Dallas who - if memory serves right - were the only undefeated team in the MLS season when the two met. The focus around these parts should now be on Project 2022. I really don't understand the desire of US Soccer to set itself up for failure and ridicule repeatedly. Be it Project 2010 or now this 2022 date. MLS has certainly improved in recent years although I would argue the lion's share of that improvement has been "off-the-field" in infrastructure. Is it that difficult to remain humble until the level of play actually warrants such talk? Oh well - if ridicule is sought, ridicule shall be given.